What you "feel" is irrelevant. What matters are the details which at this juncture are unknown. What we DO know is what the Vatican has done in the past with ordinaries like the ICKSP who have bent over backwards in an effort to be in "communion" with Rome. Whenever it suits Rome, they just make up an excuse to justify their command that the ICKSP must vacate their buildings and leave the diocese, which of course the diocese then takes as their own property which is convenient given the financial disaster that is the false church. Based on that and experiences like it, this is a trap to lure faithful Catholics to voluntarily subject themselves to the control of a heretical entity that is no longer the Church Jesus established, but is a synagogue of satan. No thank you!
You are so right. And the SSPX, stated so clearly by the Superior General, Fr. Pagliarani, demands the Mass for ALL the faithful, for ALL time, not just the Society. This is just mealy mouthed gobbledy-gook.
"Faced with this apparent contradiction, the most coherent solution would seem to be the recognition, de facto if not yet fully de iure, of the existence of two distinct Latin rites: an ancient or traditional Latin rite, and a reformed Latin rite. Such recognition would make it possible to move beyond a conceptual opposition that has become increasingly difficult to sustain, while offering a clearer theological and canonical framework."
The better answer is just to say Francis made a mistake. It was a mistake to try and force people into the Novus Ordo against their will. And just like the resolution of the liturgical dispute in India, Leo can just say he's not bound by this mistake, and he will choose his own path. Nobody cared when he did this, and nobody will care if he does this with the TLM.
There is a strong argument to be made for a juridical structure of the TLM, but it should be done in companion to a SP type legislation, not in place of it. Let priests say the TLM if they want in dioceses, and let the TLM Ordinariate exist for those who want a more dedicated offering of the TLM by those priests and parishes that offeronly that.
Yes, Traditionis Custodes can be abrogated by Pope Leo but he's said that he's not going to. The traditional cardinals are working hard for the Vatican to establish a safe haven for the ancient Mass and break the terribly contentious impasse between Summorum Pontificum and Traditionis Custodes. We should pray for their efforts. I've been a member of the Ordinariate of the Chair of Peter since Anglicanorum Caetibus was promulgated by Pope Benedict XV and got under way in 2010. Membership is not restricted to converted Episcopalians. I and my family members are lifelong Roman Catholics. The ordinariate has had a bumpy road along the way but I think the structure could work nationally with a bishop leading; some flexibility is needed to satisfy bishops with overlapping geographical jurisdictions. There are challenges. But let's face it. There are bishops hostile to the national, non-territorial structure of ordinariates, I think. The military ordinariate has been around awhile and makes perfect sense but the current Ordinariate in America established for Episcopalian converts is struggling financially; parishes are very small. A strong Pope without prejudices against the ancient Tridentine Mass can make it work but the emphasis is on COURAGE. It is highly probable in my view the Pope will receive tremendous blowback from the hierarchy like St. Pope Paul VI did after he published HUMANAE VITAE. I hope I'm wrong. Well, Popes are not called to a cushy, soft life. Most of the earliest Popes were martyred.
Oh people would care. Andrea Grillo might die of a heart attack. I imagine more of a return to ED days then SP. But who knows, maybe they demand trads follow the 65 missal
Nobody would care that matters. As for "a return to ED instead of SP", Ecclesia Dei was premised on the idea it would be temporary, and eventually the TLM would be abolished because everyone chose the NO. 1988 happened and made clear that was never going to happen, so the Indult was in a bit of ecclesiastical no mans land.
If the latin Mass isn't going to be banned, it doesn't make much sense to return to the Indult.
And if the solution discussed were implemented, you would still have to return to this.
Traditionalists should oppose this proposal because it will turn traditionalism into being something insular, but the Traditional Mass is for the whole Church, and all priests have a right to say it. It shouldn’t be restricted to a few places.
Plus, why should a layman who likes the TLM have to go to some place that’s not his territorial parish if it doesn’t offer the TLM.
The rights of priests need to be respected, and the laity should be have their freedom to ask their parish priests to say the TLM respected.
Well said, Nick. But it is more than just the rights of priests. It is a formally declared doctrine that has never been formally renounced that the Tridentine Rite of the Mass is the ONLY Mass that can be offered. See Quo Primum, and St. Paul's letter to the Galatians where he declares that the if anyone teaches a Gospel different than that taught by the Apostles, let them be anathema. Clearly most of what is taught by the post V-II conciliar "church" is not the same Gospel as what the apostles taught, and thus anathema.
The problem is, that traditionalists are not simply "attached" to TLM as is repeateadly stated in text. Because TML and NO ultimately represent different faiths. The one which believes in Real Presence and receives kneeling and on the tongue, and the one, which does not and receives standing proud and in hands. And the ultimate conflict therefore is inevitable. What is proposed, is, in fact, return to Summorum Pontificum status quo, but in a different, non-confrontational way, providing a way to escape annullment of Traditionis Custodes and thus denying pope Francis legacy, which is continued by Leo.
Agree.And even more. It is all about Traditional Catholic sound doctrine where an error can be called out and said it is an error. It is about the Catholic teaching and not only TLM. Besides, they will not let it happen. Otherwise the TLM goers would outnumber the NO goers with all due respect.
Not only override Bergoglio on the TLM, but make it mandatory to make the Novus Ordo more reverent. STOP THE NOISE and DEMAND PEOPLE TO RECEIVE ON THE TONGUE! And no alter girls, and no women around the alter or even men that shouldn't be there! And absolutely no extraordinary ministers!
Some of us expected +Benedict XVI, of happy memory, to establish an Ordinariate or some other personal jurisdiction for the Traditional Liturgy. Perhaps, he underestimated how much antipathy there is for those attached to traditional prayer and worship. Perhaps, his only failure was to be too hopeful. One cannot fault him for that. I remain hopeful that +Leo will provide a canonical pathway. Perhaps, soon?
The actual information that we have from Diane Montagne’s reporting on the survey of bishops is that SP was working just fine and that the bishops strongly recommended against changing or fiddling with it. TC, we also learned, was based on an apparently intentional misrepresentation of the bishops’ opinion, otherwise known as an untruth. In the Catholic World, otherwise known as the Real World, the distinction between Truth and Untruth matters extremely. To allow a policy based on an known Untruth to persist in its destructive and cruel course in the Church is a grave matter. I pray that our Holy Father will not allow that to happen under his vicariate.
The elephant remains in the room, two liturgies professing two different theologies, one in continuity with the Apostles, the other the "French Revolution within the Church". Can't see the majority of cardinals who elected both Francis and Leo overlooking this.
Does this proponent really think the anti-Modernist current in TLM adherents is going to disappear or is he just hopeful they will be placated enough to ignore it and slowly come under the Conciliar spell, perhaps with mandated liturgical changes in the TLM once all are incorporated?
You are so right. I even read that some of the faithful who love "tradition" will accept the reverent NO. Thats why our priests insist we have a missal. The prayers of the True Mass must be learned and understood. They are a catechesis in themselves.
The military ordinariates are... for militar personnel. The Anglican ordinariate is for those coming from the Anglican Church... In the case an ordinariate for the Mass of the Ages might be erected, will the bishops grant freedom to their flock to incardinate into it? Or at least to freely receive the sacraments in one of the temples belonging or entrusted to this former Ecclesia Del communities? Have they considered the risk of apartheid, so the gates will close for those not already belonging, or attending TLM?
Notice there is no mention of any of the other sacraments, besides the Eucharist, that are included in the proposed "TLM Ordinate." But TLM goers don't just want the Vetus Ordo Mass, they want their children baptized, catechized, confirmed, and themselves to be married, ministered to when ill or dying, and buried, using the old rites. They want their sacramentals, including water, rosaries, candles and other items used in religion blessed by the older prayers. They want Latin.
And so the real issue; in practice, is that the TLM is a rejection and repudiation of the "reforms" of Vatican II. This would not be just a specialized "ordinate." It's a revival of Catholicism. And under Summorum Pontificum the revival of Catholicism was gaining momentum. That's why the TLM (and ALL the associated rites and practices) had to be quashed.
The implementation of Vatican II cut down the huge tree that had grown from the mustard seed. But the still living roots began sprouting, and seeing that, the Modernists had to cut that down lest it grow full size again. The Modernists know there is no conciliatory solution, because the issue is far deeper than practice. It's belief.
The true Church is not limited to one Sacrament. Catholic dogma says the Catholic Faith must be practiced and accepted in its entirety. Anyone who wants to choose which parts they will accept and which they won't is NOT Catholic!
The more things Change, the clearer the Picture becomes, Higher Resolution. Genesis 13, Humanity pitches a tent between Bethel and Ai.
Bethel comes from the Hebrew “Beit El” which literally means ‘House of God’. Today humanity is pitching a tent between Bethel and A.I., between the real House of God, and the Neon A.I. gods “they” have made. Reinforced by “likes” dopamine brain chemistry into an “accuser” rabbit hole. The “ha Satan” accuser rabbit hole of Job. Are we “tough enough”?
Proverbs 1:7, Fear of the Lord is the beginning of Knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.
I don't see why we need a new ecclesial jurisdiction that is overseen by an Archbishop when all we have to do is rescind the legal changes made by Francis to Personal Prelatures and use that time-tested structure that report(ed) into the Dicastery of Bishops.
I feel like it is healthier to have the TLM in diocesan parishes where trads mingle with non-trads. So each can see and learn from the other.
What you "feel" is irrelevant. What matters are the details which at this juncture are unknown. What we DO know is what the Vatican has done in the past with ordinaries like the ICKSP who have bent over backwards in an effort to be in "communion" with Rome. Whenever it suits Rome, they just make up an excuse to justify their command that the ICKSP must vacate their buildings and leave the diocese, which of course the diocese then takes as their own property which is convenient given the financial disaster that is the false church. Based on that and experiences like it, this is a trap to lure faithful Catholics to voluntarily subject themselves to the control of a heretical entity that is no longer the Church Jesus established, but is a synagogue of satan. No thank you!
You are so right. And the SSPX, stated so clearly by the Superior General, Fr. Pagliarani, demands the Mass for ALL the faithful, for ALL time, not just the Society. This is just mealy mouthed gobbledy-gook.
"Faced with this apparent contradiction, the most coherent solution would seem to be the recognition, de facto if not yet fully de iure, of the existence of two distinct Latin rites: an ancient or traditional Latin rite, and a reformed Latin rite. Such recognition would make it possible to move beyond a conceptual opposition that has become increasingly difficult to sustain, while offering a clearer theological and canonical framework."
The better answer is just to say Francis made a mistake. It was a mistake to try and force people into the Novus Ordo against their will. And just like the resolution of the liturgical dispute in India, Leo can just say he's not bound by this mistake, and he will choose his own path. Nobody cared when he did this, and nobody will care if he does this with the TLM.
There is a strong argument to be made for a juridical structure of the TLM, but it should be done in companion to a SP type legislation, not in place of it. Let priests say the TLM if they want in dioceses, and let the TLM Ordinariate exist for those who want a more dedicated offering of the TLM by those priests and parishes that offeronly that.
Yes - Pope F made a mistake. In several ways. Revoke Tradiciones Custodes and uphold Summorum Pontificum. Can this be done?
Yes, Traditionis Custodes can be abrogated by Pope Leo but he's said that he's not going to. The traditional cardinals are working hard for the Vatican to establish a safe haven for the ancient Mass and break the terribly contentious impasse between Summorum Pontificum and Traditionis Custodes. We should pray for their efforts. I've been a member of the Ordinariate of the Chair of Peter since Anglicanorum Caetibus was promulgated by Pope Benedict XV and got under way in 2010. Membership is not restricted to converted Episcopalians. I and my family members are lifelong Roman Catholics. The ordinariate has had a bumpy road along the way but I think the structure could work nationally with a bishop leading; some flexibility is needed to satisfy bishops with overlapping geographical jurisdictions. There are challenges. But let's face it. There are bishops hostile to the national, non-territorial structure of ordinariates, I think. The military ordinariate has been around awhile and makes perfect sense but the current Ordinariate in America established for Episcopalian converts is struggling financially; parishes are very small. A strong Pope without prejudices against the ancient Tridentine Mass can make it work but the emphasis is on COURAGE. It is highly probable in my view the Pope will receive tremendous blowback from the hierarchy like St. Pope Paul VI did after he published HUMANAE VITAE. I hope I'm wrong. Well, Popes are not called to a cushy, soft life. Most of the earliest Popes were martyred.
Correction: Pope Benedict XVI.
Oh people would care. Andrea Grillo might die of a heart attack. I imagine more of a return to ED days then SP. But who knows, maybe they demand trads follow the 65 missal
Nobody would care that matters. As for "a return to ED instead of SP", Ecclesia Dei was premised on the idea it would be temporary, and eventually the TLM would be abolished because everyone chose the NO. 1988 happened and made clear that was never going to happen, so the Indult was in a bit of ecclesiastical no mans land.
If the latin Mass isn't going to be banned, it doesn't make much sense to return to the Indult.
And if the solution discussed were implemented, you would still have to return to this.
Traditionalists should oppose this proposal because it will turn traditionalism into being something insular, but the Traditional Mass is for the whole Church, and all priests have a right to say it. It shouldn’t be restricted to a few places.
Plus, why should a layman who likes the TLM have to go to some place that’s not his territorial parish if it doesn’t offer the TLM.
The rights of priests need to be respected, and the laity should be have their freedom to ask their parish priests to say the TLM respected.
Well said, Nick. But it is more than just the rights of priests. It is a formally declared doctrine that has never been formally renounced that the Tridentine Rite of the Mass is the ONLY Mass that can be offered. See Quo Primum, and St. Paul's letter to the Galatians where he declares that the if anyone teaches a Gospel different than that taught by the Apostles, let them be anathema. Clearly most of what is taught by the post V-II conciliar "church" is not the same Gospel as what the apostles taught, and thus anathema.
This article provides better reasons why Catholics must reject such compromises with the conciliar sect according to Church teaching.
https://www.wmreview.org/p/fr-de-blignieres-proposal
Solution is to simply abolish Traditionis Custodes and ALL of Bergoglio’s writings
That is a start, but not sufficient to end all the errors of V-II.
Leo is a NWO Mason hired help apparatchik- expect nothing- every last one of these bastards need to be expelled on their faces universally.
According to the 1917 Code of Canon Law, they have excommunicated themselves by their heresies, so no expulsion is required. (See Canon 2314)
The problem is, that traditionalists are not simply "attached" to TLM as is repeateadly stated in text. Because TML and NO ultimately represent different faiths. The one which believes in Real Presence and receives kneeling and on the tongue, and the one, which does not and receives standing proud and in hands. And the ultimate conflict therefore is inevitable. What is proposed, is, in fact, return to Summorum Pontificum status quo, but in a different, non-confrontational way, providing a way to escape annullment of Traditionis Custodes and thus denying pope Francis legacy, which is continued by Leo.
So true, especially that the conciliar church is NOT the true Catholic Church founded by Jesus.
Agree.And even more. It is all about Traditional Catholic sound doctrine where an error can be called out and said it is an error. It is about the Catholic teaching and not only TLM. Besides, they will not let it happen. Otherwise the TLM goers would outnumber the NO goers with all due respect.
Thank you. Annulment is wisest. I find the clergy to be sneaky.
Not only override Bergoglio on the TLM, but make it mandatory to make the Novus Ordo more reverent. STOP THE NOISE and DEMAND PEOPLE TO RECEIVE ON THE TONGUE! And no alter girls, and no women around the alter or even men that shouldn't be there! And absolutely no extraordinary ministers!
It is impossible to make an heretical act reverent.
Did you mean extraordinary ministers?
Exactly, yes.
Some of us expected +Benedict XVI, of happy memory, to establish an Ordinariate or some other personal jurisdiction for the Traditional Liturgy. Perhaps, he underestimated how much antipathy there is for those attached to traditional prayer and worship. Perhaps, his only failure was to be too hopeful. One cannot fault him for that. I remain hopeful that +Leo will provide a canonical pathway. Perhaps, soon?
The actual information that we have from Diane Montagne’s reporting on the survey of bishops is that SP was working just fine and that the bishops strongly recommended against changing or fiddling with it. TC, we also learned, was based on an apparently intentional misrepresentation of the bishops’ opinion, otherwise known as an untruth. In the Catholic World, otherwise known as the Real World, the distinction between Truth and Untruth matters extremely. To allow a policy based on an known Untruth to persist in its destructive and cruel course in the Church is a grave matter. I pray that our Holy Father will not allow that to happen under his vicariate.
The elephant remains in the room, two liturgies professing two different theologies, one in continuity with the Apostles, the other the "French Revolution within the Church". Can't see the majority of cardinals who elected both Francis and Leo overlooking this.
Does this proponent really think the anti-Modernist current in TLM adherents is going to disappear or is he just hopeful they will be placated enough to ignore it and slowly come under the Conciliar spell, perhaps with mandated liturgical changes in the TLM once all are incorporated?
It is a device of the enemy who wants to destroy ALL of God's creation.
You are so right. I even read that some of the faithful who love "tradition" will accept the reverent NO. Thats why our priests insist we have a missal. The prayers of the True Mass must be learned and understood. They are a catechesis in themselves.
The vetus ordo is a precious treasure and should be widely adopted.
The military ordinariates are... for militar personnel. The Anglican ordinariate is for those coming from the Anglican Church... In the case an ordinariate for the Mass of the Ages might be erected, will the bishops grant freedom to their flock to incardinate into it? Or at least to freely receive the sacraments in one of the temples belonging or entrusted to this former Ecclesia Del communities? Have they considered the risk of apartheid, so the gates will close for those not already belonging, or attending TLM?
Notice there is no mention of any of the other sacraments, besides the Eucharist, that are included in the proposed "TLM Ordinate." But TLM goers don't just want the Vetus Ordo Mass, they want their children baptized, catechized, confirmed, and themselves to be married, ministered to when ill or dying, and buried, using the old rites. They want their sacramentals, including water, rosaries, candles and other items used in religion blessed by the older prayers. They want Latin.
And so the real issue; in practice, is that the TLM is a rejection and repudiation of the "reforms" of Vatican II. This would not be just a specialized "ordinate." It's a revival of Catholicism. And under Summorum Pontificum the revival of Catholicism was gaining momentum. That's why the TLM (and ALL the associated rites and practices) had to be quashed.
The implementation of Vatican II cut down the huge tree that had grown from the mustard seed. But the still living roots began sprouting, and seeing that, the Modernists had to cut that down lest it grow full size again. The Modernists know there is no conciliatory solution, because the issue is far deeper than practice. It's belief.
The true Church is not limited to one Sacrament. Catholic dogma says the Catholic Faith must be practiced and accepted in its entirety. Anyone who wants to choose which parts they will accept and which they won't is NOT Catholic!
The more things Change, the clearer the Picture becomes, Higher Resolution. Genesis 13, Humanity pitches a tent between Bethel and Ai.
Bethel comes from the Hebrew “Beit El” which literally means ‘House of God’. Today humanity is pitching a tent between Bethel and A.I., between the real House of God, and the Neon A.I. gods “they” have made. Reinforced by “likes” dopamine brain chemistry into an “accuser” rabbit hole. The “ha Satan” accuser rabbit hole of Job. Are we “tough enough”?
Proverbs 1:7, Fear of the Lord is the beginning of Knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction.
I don't see why we need a new ecclesial jurisdiction that is overseen by an Archbishop when all we have to do is rescind the legal changes made by Francis to Personal Prelatures and use that time-tested structure that report(ed) into the Dicastery of Bishops.
Diane— you might want to read this, and all your subscribers should too:
https://open.substack.com/pub/radicalfidelity/p/why-father-louis-marie-de-blignieres?r=qw5jk&utm_medium=ios
My solution…Found A Sedes Priest, and go to Mass of the Ages when he is in town. No Vatican II, no submission to freemasonry